Need everyone's opinion on a trade

So one of my owners in my league had to leave due to personal problems, as I mentioned before I had a waiting list going and the first person up was someone I knew in real life. He's one of my father's friends and best friends with another member in my league, also married to his sister. So needless to say they are very close. As mentioned I also have a 14 day no trade policy. That 14 days passed 2 days ago. This trade was just made 30 minutes ago:

Titans trades:

Brad Richards
R J Umberger
Dion Phaneuf
Ondrej Pavelec

Bruins (New Member) trades:

Nicklas Backstrom
Andrei Markov
Jimmy Howard



I don't have a veto rule in my league. I make the desicions if I think there is collusion. In the last 30 minutes I've recieved 4 emails from members of the league and they aren't happy about this trade one bit. To be honest I'm not happy in the slightest with the trade either. I'm trying to find the advantage that Bruins is getting from dealing Markov and Backstrom and getting these trouble players. Titans keep 11 players this offseason where Bruins keep 14 players.

Umberger's highest point total was 55 points to date.
Richards is undergoing surgery this summer and even though he hit 91 points this season do we really think he's the corner stone of a blockbuster deal?
I'm against vetos and I'm against aiding other managers manage their teams. But this reeks of something foul. Both guys seem like standup guys and have known my father for 20 some odd years. And I would hope that they aren't in it together but I don't think I should allow my "relationship" to them blind me from anything. Can anyone here sell me on why Bruins would make this trade?
Pavelec is an OK keeper at this point in time, I would rather have Howard.
Phaneuf, maybe its cause I think this guy is trash (personality wise) but he's not worth the scum on a 40 year old sink. He has regressed since he hit his peak 3 years ago and why would I bank on maybes while I have 2 surefire hits in Backstrom and Markov?


The league stats are LW LW LW C C C RW RW RW D D D D G G and bench spots, weekly swaps.
G 5,A 5,SOG 0.2,PIM 0.3,+-, hit 0.2, shot 0.2
W 7,SO 7,S 0.2,GA -1

Basically, I'll be asking them both about their trade but want to know if I should go beyond issuing a warning?

Here are the rosters for the league

This deal allows one to conclude collusion. I'm uncertain how anyone could get these guys placed on the table together.

Backstrom/B Richards - You don't say goal or centre. If it's the centre, well you've got to want the higher scoring guy that's a decade younger. I can see two guys filling needs flip flopping Backstrom the tender for B Richards the centre.

Markov/Phaneuf - certainly buy low time on Phaneuf. Markov easily one of the top 5 D-men in Fantasy at this time. Phaneuf could win the deal over the long haul. Certainly short term it's all Markov.

Howard/Pavelec - Pavelec hopes to become Howard.... Pavelec is in a good situation to establish himself. Howard has done a wonderful job with a good club. I want Howard.

Umberger - who gives a damn.

It's ugly.

Just to take a step back back for a moment and analyze this from a different perspective. I personally would never do this trade but...

Brad Richards had only 10 less points then Backstrom this season.

Pavelec played a fair amount of games and has a decent AHL history.

Phaneuf could easily be argued to be the victim of a bad year on a team that had nothing going well for them and longer term could be the better producing defenseman and is a good chunk younger than Markov.

Throw in Umberger to make up the difference and you have the potential for a hockey deal.

I think this is a pretty bad deal but all it takes is for someone to be a big fan of a guy like Phaneuf and to have some misunderstandings about how to make hockey trades (that picking up multiple lesser players is hardly ever as good as less more valued players for example) and I 'could' see how this trade could happen.

Is the person that acquired Phanuef a Leafs fan? They could view Phanuef as one of the best young D man in the game, combined with a 90+ point producing Conn Smythe winner, a solid young goaltender and think 'Hey I am getting Umberger in the deal as well who is a solid 55 point player - that more then makes up the difference in the production in the other guys!'

Really ugly trade and a very suspicious one I agree Jay.

That said, Joel has very cleverly stated that under certain circumstances such a trade could be conceived of as 'fair'.

Might be time to get a veto option into your pool Jay.

A very ugly trade, but I don't think it's veto worthy. I tend to follow Joel's line of thinking on this one. It seems more like bad judgment from a rookie fantasy hockey dude than collusion.

Sucks to have inexperienced GMs take the place of somebody solid, but what can you do? Maybe do a better job of vetting future participants?

The only thing I might consider doing if you feel strongly about it is to ask the guy on the ugly side of the trade why he wanted Phaneuf/Richards/Pavelec/Umberger, and why he felt these players were worth more than the ones he gave up. He should be able to give you a reasonable answer (though misguided one), and if he can't, then you can start to wonder.

tough situation. i feel the same as the last three posts. you got a great deal but IMO not veto worthy. also i think the other managers should have went to the gm and not the new guy coming in if they had a problem.

Soo Storm schrieb:

tough situation. i feel the same as the last three posts. you got a great deal but IMO not veto worthy. also i think the other managers should have went to the gm and not the new guy coming in if they had a problem.

Then you might have ended up with a Butch situation. Tough situations like this should be dealt with through the Commish IMO.